Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement

[Elky Welky]

The thing is, I think we can have our cake and eat it too to a large degree. You can have opportunity with a relatively long season. You can also have a few more older deer by slightly shorter seasons and moving them back a few weeks. Killing a mule deer isn’t very hard, so any opportunity with the rifle is reasonable whether it’s October or November. You can also combat cwd by targeting the higher populations of congregated deer with B tags on private land(maybe a season for private land B tags starting right after the general season?). The biggest point is that some quality and fair opportunity don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

I think that’s totally fair. My point was rhetorical, as this thread (when it is on topic) seems to largely go back and forth between those extremes.

I certainly felt that polarization at the FWP meeting I went to last week.

 

[Nameless Range]

It’s a dead horse, but my own anecdotal experience over the last 30 years in the Boulder Mountains is that of mule deer age class collapse.

I agree with @Elky Welky that Montana is an “opportunity state”, and I actually hope we continue to view opportunity as a virtue. I have shot my fair share of two points, hell I have written about it on here. Next year my 10 year old boy, the most enthusiastic human I have ever known, will be hunting deer. Knowing what is out on the landscape here, it is likely and I will view it as a blessing, if we will kill a 2.5 year old mule deer.

We could retain an enormous pile of chance – our status as a state of opportunity – and still reign things in a bit. I think a successful discussion we could have with most Montanans would not be that of drastic change, but one of balance. If we shifted our rifle season to be one week earlier, and removed the last week, I believe it would have a meaningful effect on the structure of age class in many HDs across our state. A guy would still have 5 weeks to chase the bucks. Just have the season end the first week of Nov.

It's not judgement, nor a desire for “trophies”. It's actually deeper than that. If I speak to the hills I grew up in alone, I can wager the story rhymes with others across divides. What do we really know about mule deer in these mountains? When we don't allow deer to ever "get old", which in Montana really just means mature reasonably, we are potentially missing out on knowledge. Perhaps it is behavior, or dynamics, or some other gift the observer ain’t getting, but it's hard not believe that there is a really fascinating aspect of "deerness" that is void from the landscape. Maybe even a wisdom. Much the same as how incomplete a study of some human civilization would be if none of its members ever surpassed the age of 25. In terms of Odocoileus hemionus, the landscape is littered with children and teens, and bare of men.

It's one reason the Elkhorns, as imperfect as they are, have spirituality in them to me. There’s likely elk in that range right now, that were born when George W. Bush was still president. Maybe we don’t need that level of depth, but in the HD where I live, I am skeptical a deer exists that is as old as my 5 year old son.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

@Elky Welky are you content with FWP's management of mule deer?

 

[DFS]

I think that’s totally fair. My point was rhetorical, as this thread (when it is on topic) seems to largely go back and forth between those extremes.

I certainly felt that polarization at the FWP meeting I went to last week.

Montana is an opportunity state we should and can provide that opportunity, if things continue on the trajectory it’s going that opportunity will be acrossed the fence on private where they don’t kill everything. It will continue to make the divide of landowners and sportsman even greater.

Things need to change now.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

- Separate Elk, Mule Deer and WT deer tags into separate permits
- Pick a unit with the option to buy a permit for a second or third unit (at least you collect more R money)

You think part of the fix is letting people shoot multiple bucks?

 

[rogerthat]

It’s a dead horse, but my own anecdotal experience over the last 30 years in the Boulder Mountains is that of mule deer age class collapse.

I agree with @Elky Welky that Montana is an “opportunity state”, and I actually hope we continue to view opportunity as a virtue. I have shot my fair share of two points, hell I have written about it on here. Next year my 10 year old boy, the most enthusiastic human I have ever known, will be hunting deer. Knowing what is out on the landscape here, it is likely and I will view it as a blessing, if we will kill a 2.5 year old mule deer.

We could retain an enormous pile of chance – our status as a state of opportunity – and still reign things in a bit. I think a successful discussion we could have with most Montanans would not be that of drastic change, but one of balance. If we shifted our rifle season to be one week earlier, and removed the last week, I believe it would have a meaningful effect on the structure of age class in many HDs across our state. A guy would still have 5 weeks to chase the bucks. Just have the season end the first week of Nov.

It's not judgement, nor a desire for “trophies”. It's actually deeper than that. If I speak to the hills I grew up in alone, I can wager the story rhymes with others across divides. What do we really know about mule deer in these mountains? When we don't allow deer to ever "get old", which in Montana really just means mature reasonably, we are potentially missing out on knowledge. Perhaps it is behavior, or dynamics, or some other gift the observer ain’t getting, but it's hard not believe that there is a really fascinating aspect of "deerness" that is void from the landscape. Maybe even a wisdom. Much the same as how incomplete a study of some human civilization would be if none of its members ever surpassed the age of 25. In terms of Odocoileus hemionus, the landscape is littered with children and teens, and bare of men.

It's one reason the Elkhorns, as imperfect as they are, have spirituality in them to me. There’s likely elk in that range right now, that were born when George W. Bush was still president. Maybe we don’t need that level of depth, but in the HD where I live, I am skeptical a deer exists that is as old as my 5 year old son.

Great post thanks

 

[SAJ-99]

You think part of the fix is letting people shoot multiple bucks?

No. You get one carcass tag valid for multiple species and permits if held.

 

[antlerradar]

"Better" is subjective. Are we talking numbers? Size? Buck to doe Ratios? Lack of CWD? Pressure? Habitat? Access?

I'm really just playing a bit of devil's advocate here... I've found this to be one heck of a hornets nest to poke (see the comment above about people getting run off this thread). But do want to assure you @rogerthat that I wasn't calling your experience out specifically. Mine is quite similar.

But sometimes this thread seems to be about having our cake and eating it too: is Montana an opportunity state? Or are we managing for trophy class? How mad should we be at the nonresident or kid who gets to shoot their very first mule deer, even if it is a forky during the rut? What about someone who can't get out much and likes to fill their freezer with doe meat; are they truly villains? Should every drainage have its own season and biologist managing it, and regulations and rules that change every year? Or should our regulations be more streamlined statewide? Since things are different in my neck of the woods does that make it everyone's problem?

I would like ice cream with that cake please.
If the only trade off managing Montana as a maximum opportunity state was very few trophy class bucks, you have a solid augment for more opportunity. Fewer big bucks however in not the only trade off. Long seasons during the rut, liberal tag allocations and few regulations make it easier for landowners make more money from hunting and at the same time those long seasons and liberal tags are increasing the hassle of hunting season for landowners. This is a recipe that will bake a very expensive cake for us to eat. Texas is an opportunity state with long seasons during the rut and liberal tags. If Montana hunters think that Montana can have near unlimited opportunity and avoid the commercialization of Texas they truly do think that we can have cake and ice cream and eating it too.

 

[Elky Welky]

@Elky Welky are you content with FWP's management of mule deer?

Simple question, difficult answer, so I apologize in advance. But I'll do my best to answer, if you'll stick with me.

As I indicated around 30+ pages ago, I'm actually new to much of the arguments around mule deer. For me, mulies have always been an afterthought to elk, and filling that tag has never been priority. I really enjoy hunting them, and since I moved to my new home east of where I grew up I've had more time to dedicate to it, so I've found more success and more deer. But historically, if my elk tag wasn't filled by thanksgiving, I turned my attention to getting a deer in my freezer that last weekend. I like mule deer meat, but I like elk more.

I met many dedicated and smart biologists at the FWP meeting last week, and I think they are doing the best they can in an administration that ultimately isn't that interested in (non-landowning, non-moneyed) Montana hunters. So my ultimate answer is that I am not content with FWP's management, more so than their management of mule deer specifically.

The current model of mule deer hunting seemed to work all those years ago when I shot two off my porch as a high schooler, but with hunter numbers exploding, private land priorities moving towards amenity property and not working ranches, elk population problems crowding out deer, nonresident issues (perceived or real), diminishing block management enrollment, CWD, etc., the issues I see with FWP are in their management of wildlife and hunters as a whole, not just mule deer. I can't just look at it in isolation, and I applaud them for making some efforts now to recognize the problems with it.

 

[DFS]

Simple question, difficult answer, so I apologize in advance. But I'll do my best to answer, if you'll stick with me.

As I indicated around 30+ pages ago, I'm actually new to much of the arguments around mule deer. For me, mulies have always been an afterthought to elk, and filling that tag has never been priority. I really enjoy hunting them, and since I moved to my new home east of where I grew up I've had more time to dedicate to it, so I've found more success and more deer. But historically, if my elk tag wasn't filled by thanksgiving, I turned my attention to getting a deer in my freezer that last weekend. I like mule deer meat, but I like elk more.

I met many dedicated and smart biologists at the FWP meeting last week, and I think they are doing the best they can in an administration that ultimately isn't that interested in (non-landowning, non-moneyed) Montana hunters. So my ultimate answer is that I am not content with FWP's management, more so than their management of mule deer specifically.

The current model of mule deer hunting seemed to work all those years ago when I shot two off my porch as a high schooler, but with hunter numbers exploding, private land priorities moving towards amenity property and not working ranches, elk population problems crowding out deer, nonresident issues (perceived or real), diminishing block management enrollment, CWD, etc., the issues I see with FWP are in their management of wildlife and hunters as a whole, not just mule deer. I can't just look at it in isolation, and I applaud them for making some efforts now to recognize the problems with it.

Wow that was confusing, I think I just read you will be in a primary against GG for the Republican nominee for governor of Montana?

 

[rogerthat]

Wow that was confusing, I think I just read you will be in a primary against GG for the Republican nominee for governor of Montana?

If it helps @Elky Welky has my vote

 

[Elky Welky]

Wow that was confusing, I think I just read you will be in a primary against GG for the Republican nominee for governor of Montana?

Close enough @DougStickney Thanks @rogerthat !

 

[Deleted member 48080]

Sounds like the experts have it under control. Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[DFS]

I met many dedicated and smart biologists at the FWP meeting last week, and I think they are doing the best they can in an administration that ultimately isn't that interested in (non-landowning, non-moneyed) Montana hunters. So my ultimate answer is that I am not content with FWP's management, more so than their management of mule deer specifically.

All kidding aside the biologists have been there way longer than the administration. They have worked through a more favorable climate.

 

[antlerradar]

I attended a meeting last night as well. There were only a couple of us that showed up. The biologists did a good job I thought and were very open to hearing our concerns. I’ll stick to the mule deer aspect of the meeting in this post. A couple takeaways: They seemed fairly serious about the consideration of going to a quota for mule deer buck permits by region at some point. It sounds like the season structure is very unlikely to change anytime soon. Due to the concerns of cwd, herds will generally be managed for a younger age class of bucks. Those are just a few takeaways. Some of this is how it was told to me and some is more of how I interpreted it. I don’t necessarily agree with everything, but I appreciated that the biologists came prepared and legitimately were interested in our concerns/opinions.

There was a better turn out at Miles City, maybe 20 counting those on line. I got the same impression as you when it comes to mule deer and most people in attendance seamed to agree that Montana can not just continue with the same old same old when it comes to mule deer. I take that as a positive. While the mule deer proposals are not as far reaching as I would like, I do think they are a step or two in the right direction. Biggest negative was the resistance from FWP to limiting doe harvest on public land. Seams like a easy fix to me, but department insists that private land doe tags will not make a difference biologically. I am not biologist enough to know one way or the other, but my gut tells me the doe tags do make a difference on the big accessible blocks of public. Even if FWP is right and there is little effect I don't think the political hit they are taking by having region wide doe tags is worth it.

 

[8andcounting]

There was a better turn out at Miles City, maybe 20 counting those on line. I got the same impression as you when it comes to mule deer and most people in attendance seamed to agree that Montana can not just continue with the same old same old when it comes to mule deer. I take that as a positive. While the mule deer proposals are not as far reaching as I would like, I do think they are a step or two in the right direction. Biggest negative was the resistance from FWP to limiting doe harvest on public land. Seams like an easy fix to me, but department insists that private land doe tags will not make a difference biologically. I am not biologist enough to know one way or the other, but my gut tells me the doe tags do make a difference on the big accessible blocks of public. Even if FWP is right and there is little effect I don't think the political hit they are taking by having region wide doe tags is worth it.

So shooting doe’s on public doesn’t hurt the deer numbers on public? Hmmm . Guess I should have went to school to be a biologist . Wow

 

[mtnkid85]

There was a better turn out at Miles City, maybe 20 counting those on line. I got the same impression as you when it comes to mule deer and most people in attendance seamed to agree that Montana can not just continue with the same old same old when it comes to mule deer. I take that as a positive. While the mule deer proposals are not as far reaching as I would like, I do think they are a step or two in the right direction. Biggest negative was the resistance from FWP to limiting doe harvest on public land. Seams like a easy fix to me, but department insists that private land doe tags will not make a difference biologically. I am not biologist enough to know one way or the other, but my gut tells me the doe tags do make a difference on the big accessible blocks of public. Even if FWP is right and there is little effect I don't think the political hit they are taking by having region wide doe tags is worth it.

In much of R5 they are proposing changing from either sex to antlered buck only on a general license. That doesn't address the B licenses but it is a step in the right direction.
Like you say, Id like to see the B licenses for private only.

 

[DFS]

FWP Adjusts Mule Deer Quotas In Response To Spring Surveys | Montana FWP

While mule deer populations remain steady in portions of the state, spring green-up surveys conducted by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife biologists showed populations in some parts of the state remain lower than desired, and as a result, licenses available to hunters in those areas have...

fwp.mt.gov

This is an interesting read. And still issuing doe tags. I truly believe the staff has no idea how much trouble they are in in many of the areas.

 

[8andcounting]

FWP Adjusts Mule Deer Quotas In Response To Spring Surveys | Montana FWP

While mule deer populations remain steady in portions of the state, spring green-up surveys conducted by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife biologists showed populations in some parts of the state remain lower than desired, and as a result, licenses available to hunters in those areas have...

fwp.mt.gov

This is an interesting read. And still issuing doe tags. I truly believe the staff has no idea how much trouble they are in in many of the areas.

But they’ve cut b tags by 91% the last few years …….

That just tells you how f’n bad the management has been . To cut them by 91% and still be selling way too many

 

[8andcounting]

Why , in the hell , would you make A tags good for buck mule deer only , and then still sell 1000 mule b tags in R 7 ….
It’s just absolutely baffling